The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

strelleymagpie said:
I wanted slightly more reach for travel photography that's all
Click to expand...

LA-EA4 adapter and Minolta 24-105 or 28-135 A mount zoom. Used, together for about £250.

Or scrape together about £550 for a used G 24-105.
 
Last edited:
strelleymagpie said:
I've recently become the owner of an A7ii with 28-70 kit lens and an E mount 55-210 (yes I know it's a crop lens and I'm limiting myself to 10mp with it but I've had some pretty good pictures with it so far). Anyway, my future plans are to get a 14mm Samyang FE ultra wide to use for astrophotography, but I need a decent (and very cheap) travel lens so was looking at the E mount 18-105 f/4 G (again, I know I'm limiting myself but I have a very small budget). Is there anything else in the sub-£400 area that I could look at as an alternative, bearing in mind that I want a bit more zoom than the kit lens
Click to expand...
I personally don’t often need long focal length for travel and so prefer to use something like the 16-35mm F4 and 24-70mm f4 as I find the wide angle more useful. I appreciate we’re all different though, and I can’t think of an FE zoom lens that has the longer focal length that comes under £400 so it looks as though you’ll be limited to E lenses and ‘only’ have 10mp.

Thinking out of the box you could always use your 28-70mm and then invest in topaz gigapixel to increase the resolution and then crop in post to give you an effective longer focal length? How this would compare to shooting at 10mp with an E lens I’m not sure.
 
Has anyone heard of pergear? They’ve brought out some CFexpress type A cards that are much more reasonably priced than others, £139 for 260GB 800mb/s read, 400mb/s write.
 
snerkler said:
Has anyone heard of pergear? They’ve brought out some CFexpress type A cards that are much more reasonably priced than others, £139 for 260GB 800mb/s read, 400mb/s write.
Click to expand...

I have - so they've been around a bit - but don't really know anything about them.
 
snerkler said:
Has anyone heard of pergear? They’ve brought out some CFexpress type A cards that are much more reasonably priced than others, £139 for 260GB 800mb/s read, 400mb/s write.
Click to expand...
I’ve just ordered one. Amazon £149 with a 10% voucher = £137 with postage. Specs claim 400 write is a minimum - but closer to 800 on testing. Coming for China so won’t see it for a couple of weeks.

I’ve slowly been switching to type a - bought 2nd hand and good prices for smaller cards. This one will be a good one for big shoots. If it’s any good I’ll order a 2nd and sell all my SDHC cards. Find the a’s really speed the workflow massively transferring images to computer etc.

Will give it a good test when I get it - if no good it will go back for full refund. Worth a shot.
 
LeeRatters said:
I'm not convinced that the A7Riii is any better at night skies than the old A7 to be honest!!

A7Riii, 24GM, MSM tracker


*** by Lee, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Nice, Corfe Castle?
simonbe said:
I’ve just ordered one. Amazon £149 with a 10% voucher = £137 with postage. Specs claim 400 write is a minimum - but closer to 800 on testing. Coming for China so won’t see it for a couple of weeks.

I’ve slowly been switching to type a - bought 2nd hand and good prices for smaller cards. This one will be a good one for big shoots. If it’s any good I’ll order a 2nd and sell all my SDHC cards. Find the a’s really speed the workflow massively transferring images to computer etc.

Will give it a good test when I get it - if no good it will go back for full refund. Worth a shot.
Click to expand...
Cool, will be interested to see what you think (y)
 
LeeRatters said:
I'm not convinced that the A7Riii is any better at night skies than the old A7 to be honest!!

A7Riii, 24GM, MSM tracker


*** by Lee, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Probably similar dynamic range but double the pixel density. Perhaps that lens isn't sharp enough for the difference to be useful.
 
snerkler said:
Nice, Corfe Castle?
Click to expand...

Yes. I shot a 3 row panorama too!

ancient_mariner said:
Probably similar dynamic range but double the pixel density. Perhaps that lens isn't sharp enough for the difference to be useful.
Click to expand...

It's weird.... I'm gonna use that recent "pop" word from this thread ..... it's like the sky just doesn't have the contrast and detail and colour and editing that the older A7 shots would have. It's hard to describe but to my eyes, compared with my older images, the sky just isn't as "good" - I think that's the best way to vaguely word it!
 
LeeRatters said:
Yes. I shot a 3 row panorama too!



It's weird.... I'm gonna use that recent "pop" word from this thread ..... it's like the sky just doesn't have the contrast and detail and colour and editing that the older A7 shots would have. It's hard to describe but to my eyes, compared with my older images, the sky just isn't as "good" - I think that's the best way to vaguely word it!
Click to expand...

Gotcha, that makes sense. Very likely the sensor response is different to what you have developed your technique and processing around, so looks disappointing. It may be possible to get the look you want with different processing, or it may be that it simply doesn't suit what you do.
 
LeeRatters said:
It's weird.... I'm gonna use that recent "pop" word from this thread ..... it's like the sky just doesn't have the contrast and detail and colour and editing that the older A7 shots would have. It's hard to describe but to my eyes, compared with my older images, the sky just isn't as "good" - I think that's the best way to vaguely word it!
Click to expand...

I think it may be down to your processing and technique. What ISO are you shooting at?
 
nandbytes said:
A7RIII has one more stop dynamic range compared to A7 and also 24GM is super sharp. I have used it on A7RIV with no issues.
Click to expand...

My assumption about the nature of the problem was incorrect.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Gotcha, that makes sense. Very likely the sensor response is different to what you have developed your technique and processing around, so looks disappointing. It may be possible to get the look you want with different processing, or it may be that it simply doesn't suit what you do.
Click to expand...

nandbytes said:
I think it may be down to your processing and technique. What ISO are you shooting at?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it is something to do with the pixel density and/or my 'old' A7 style processing.

Just to note, I've not changed any of my editing or LR profiles/presets at all though with the A7Riii - I'm more than happy with the images from it in general shooting, it's just this night sky thing.

I usually shoot around 640 iso as a base setting at night. All of my night sky exposure settings are pretty much very similar over both cameras.
 
LeeRatters said:
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it is something to do with the pixel density and/or my 'old' A7 style processing.

Just to note, I've not changed any of my editing or LR profiles/presets at all though with the A7Riii - I'm more than happy with the images from it in general shooting, it's just this night sky thing.

I usually shoot around 640 iso as a base setting at night. All of my night sky exposure settings are pretty much very similar over both cameras.
Click to expand...
Any chance it was just this particular scene, maybe more light pollution or something?
 
snerkler said:
Any chance it was just this particular scene, maybe more light pollution or something?
Click to expand...

I don't think it would be light pollution.

Annoyingly, as this subject was already a thought in my head previously, I did take both cameras with me to Corfe so I could 'test' them as such. As it turned out, when we started shooting, I thought "I could get a panorama from here maybe" hence any spare testing time just went out of the window! :rolleyes: * the pano was two rows just for the sky!

I do think it's just going to be a case of testing & comparing really as it's difficult to reach any conclusion otherwise but I do appreciate the thoughts, comments & opinions from you guys (y)
 
Didn’t have the best success at the WSBK at Donington today, murky weather with on and off drizzle meant the Superbikes were only on track for about 25mins out of a possible 90 :(

Also it was really gusty making it a real challenge to pan, even after taking the lens hood off. Hopefully I’ll have some usable shots though once I’ve gone through them (y)
 
Seems absolutely ages since i was last in here.
Did anyone ever get the Sony 20-70 f4?
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
LA-EA4 adapter and Minolta 24-105 or 28-135 A mount zoom. Used, together for about £250.
Click to expand...
If I did this, would it treat the lens as if it was a native FE and give me full coverage or does it still revert to 10mp like a crop lens?
 
strelleymagpie said:
If I did this, would it treat the lens as if it was a native FE and give me full coverage or does it still revert to 10mp like a crop lens?
Click to expand...
They are both FF lenses so will give you full coverage but honestly wouldn't bother with EA4.
As suggested try scraping together enough to get Sony 24-105 or tamron 28-200mm both of which can be found for £550-600

Or perhaps trade the A7ii for an APS-C body with 18-135mm or 16-70mm or 18-105 etc etc
 
strelleymagpie said:
If I did this, would it treat the lens as if it was a native FE and give me full coverage or does it still revert to 10mp like a crop lens?
Click to expand...

You would have full-frame coverage and Anand said. The disadvamtage is that the EA4 adapter has it's own built-in focussing system based on the earlier Sony SLT camera tech, rather than using the cameras own focussing system. Bearing in mind that you have a A7II, you will have a smaller number of focus points, but otherwise the system is probably not so different. If you had a A7III or later then you would see more difference IMO. FWIW I use adapted lenses with the EA4 adapter regularly on my A7III, and it's very workable indeed, but just not as good as using native lenses.

I wouls also agree with Anand that saving up for a used 24-105 or 28-200 would be better, but will cost about twice as much. I also have a 24-105 as my travel lens.
 
Last edited:
A proper, heavily used David Brown tractor parked on a village street and grabbed with the A65...

Old David Brown 990 Tractor A65 DSC00530.jpeg
 
Icee said:
I prefer the second one Toby.
Click to expand...
Thanks. It’s odd, I normally prefer more movement from the slower shutter but the background somehow looks a bit hazy to me, as though a Gaussian blur’s been applied
 
Last edited:
Had a trial with a Z8 today.
Was mostly shooting pigeons that were flying against a tree/bushes filled back drop (just couldn't find anything more interesting).
It kinda struggled to find focus :-/
My A7IV was no better to be honest.

Hmmm.... Just made me wonder if A1 or R5 would perform better. :thinking:

The write speed on Z8 with the SD card is not very good. Felt slower than my A7IV but it does have larger files from higher MP
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Had a trial with a Z8 today.
Was mostly shooting pigeons that were flying against a tree/bushes filled back drop (just couldn't find anything more interesting).
It kinda struggled to find focus :-/
My A7IV was no better to be honest.

Hmmm.... Just made me wonder if A1 or R5 would perform better. :thinking:

The write speed on Z8 with the SD card is not very good. Felt slower than my A7IV but it does have larger files from higher MP
Click to expand...
Do Canon still have the free trial scheme? Edit- they do
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Hmmm.... Just made me wonder if A1 or R5 would perform better. :thinking:
Click to expand...

I have had a couple of R5's and IMO even the A9 is faster focusing, I'm also not keen on Canon's lens prics/lineup.

I'm really not sure which way to go, keep the A9 and wait for either a A1 MKII or decent firmware update or Z9 which would mean around a 12k + outlay (paid for by my Sony, Canon and recently sold Pentax gear)
 
nandbytes said:
Had a trial with a Z8 today.
Was mostly shooting pigeons that were flying against a tree/bushes filled back drop (just couldn't find anything more interesting).
It kinda struggled to find focus :-/
My A7IV was no better to be honest.

Hmmm.... Just made me wonder if A1 or R5 would perform better. :thinking:

The write speed on Z8 with the SD card is not very good. Felt slower than my A7IV but it does have larger files from higher MP
Click to expand...
Do you think it could be a case of not being familiar with the best setup? I’ve found the A1 has a 6th sense for BIF/birds in general, kinda feels like cheating ;)
 
nandbytes said:
Had a trial with a Z8 today.
Was mostly shooting pigeons that were flying against a tree/bushes filled back drop (just couldn't find anything more interesting).
It kinda struggled to find focus :-/
My A7IV was no better to be honest.

Hmmm.... Just made me wonder if A1 or R5 would perform better. :thinking:

The write speed on Z8 with the SD card is not very good. Felt slower than my A7IV but it does have larger files from higher MP
Click to expand...
Interesting observation and nice to hear it away from the YouTubers. Your experience does back up the Z8/9 are still behind Sony and Nikon (slightly) on the AF. No doubt Nikon will continue to tweak the firmware.

Having had my wobble with the A1 I’m firmly keeping hold of mine. I have been out sports and BIF and I am always impressed the number of shots in focus I come away with. When they aren’t it’s mostly operator error!!

Always room for improvement - but I feel the losing focus on background is less of an issue. Is having more AF options a good thing or more confusing?!

My issue is the potential churn with Sony that they switch body more often. But saying that the A1 is way more camera than I need. And will keep me happy until the A1 mk2 is 12 months old and the grey prices mean it will be affordable for an upgrade.

Chatting with a mate who has the Z9 and reading the reviews you need to have multiple AF set ups to cater for different scenarios. My mate came from the D6 and it’s taken him 6-9 months to get used to the Z9 and he’s an experienced wildlife photographer. Speaks volumes to me.
 
simonbe said:
Interesting observation and nice to hear it away from the YouTubers. Your experience does back up the Z8/9 are still behind Sony and Nikon (slightly) on the AF. No doubt Nikon will continue to tweak the firmware.

Having had my wobble with the A1 I’m firmly keeping hold of mine. I have been out sports and BIF and I am always impressed the number of shots in focus I come away with. When they aren’t it’s mostly operator error!!

Always room for improvement - but I feel the losing focus on background is less of an issue. Is having more AF options a good thing or more confusing?!

My issue is the potential churn with Sony that they switch body more often. But saying that the A1 is way more camera than I need. And will keep me happy until the A1 mk2 is 12 months old and the grey prices mean it will be affordable for an upgrade.

Chatting with a mate who has the Z9 and reading the reviews you need to have multiple AF set ups to cater for different scenarios. My mate came from the D6 and it’s taken him 6-9 months to get used to the Z9 and he’s an experienced wildlife photographer. Speaks volumes to me.
Click to expand...
We had a brief discussion a while back, Sony doesn’t churn out new models as often as we think, on average I think we worked out they update the bodies every 3 years.

The A1 II is not rumoured to be out until 2024 now, I think the A9 III will be released later this year and that will give some idea of what the A1 Mark II will offer (y)
 
snerkler said:
We had a brief discussion a while back, Sony doesn’t churn out new models as often as we think, on average I think we worked out they update the bodies every 3 years.

The A1 II is not rumoured to be out until 2024 now, I think the A9 III will be released later this year and that will give some idea of what the A1 Mark II will offer (y)
Click to expand...
Depends which variant. We hope the A1 will be a slower release rate. But then you hope it would have had the firmware as previously discussed to give its flagship users the confidence they are being looked after having purchased the most expensive full frame mirrorless on the market.

The A7R is on version 5 in 9 years.

Nikon will be interesting as their DSLR turnover was much slower. Having to keep up with GAS every 5/6 years at £4K for the Z8 is cheaper than the A1 at £6.5k every 3 years. If Nikon keep to similar release rates.
 
Mike.P said:
I have had a couple of R5's and IMO even the A9 is faster focusing, I'm also not keen on Canon's lens prics/lineup.
Click to expand...
I have only ever used R5 to track humans. It was as good as any Sony I have used.
While I'd love to try it for birds I just realised they haven't got a single telephoto lens I'd want to own/use and I'd end up having to adapt.

Mike.P said:
I'm really not sure which way to go, keep the A9 and wait for either a A1 MKII or decent firmware update or Z9 which would mean around a 12k + outlay (paid for by my Sony, Canon and recently sold Pentax gear)
Click to expand...

If my experience today was indicative of Z9 and if it's "only" as good as A7IV then I'd feel a bit short changed. Though Z8 feels like a good body.
snerkler said:
Do you think it could be a case of not being familiar with the best setup? I’ve found the A1 has a 6th sense for BIF/birds in general, kinda feels like cheating ;)
Click to expand...
Very well could be. Unfortunately I don't have an A1 any more but from memory I never had issues finding they subject and then sticking to it. Even against really busy green backgrounds it perfectly tracks.
Sony in general is pretty simple to use/setup.
I used the settings suggested by my friend and what ever I had seen on YouTube so far.
Wasn't very effective for me.

simonbe said:
Interesting observation and nice to hear it away from the YouTubers. Your experience does back up the Z8/9 are still behind Sony and Nikon (slightly) on the AF. No doubt Nikon will continue to tweak the firmware.

Chatting with a mate who has the Z9 and reading the reviews you need to have multiple AF set ups to cater for different scenarios. My mate came from the D6 and it’s taken him 6-9 months to get used to the Z9 and he’s an experienced wildlife photographer. Speaks volumes to me.
Click to expand...

It's too much of a faff to be honest.
May be with a few more tries and I could may be get Nikon to be a bit better or get it to behave how I want. But was having to use spot with one button to initiate tracking then use another button to find it's eye and keep bird eye tracking.

In comparison while used the Z8, I lent my A7IV, and my mate seems to agree it's simpler to use.
He felt my A7IV was struggling more to keep focus but was finding subjects quickly.

The Z8 he said was opposite, finding focus was harder but it was better tracking once it found the focus. Though he is really new to the Z8 also, coming from Z7II. So I guess he's also getting used to it?

The 400PF though is super nice. Was much nice to use them my 200-600mm. May be I should have one more try to better understand the Z8.
 
nandbytes said:
The 400PF though is super nice. Was much nice to use them my 200-600mm. May be I should have one more try to better understand the Z8.
Click to expand...
That’s my only remaining GAS - the 400PF. Hopefully Sony (Sigma or Tamron) will see this is needed in the Sony E line up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top